On Monday’s Mark Levin Show, This is the time where it’s most dangerous to have an irresponsible media. All would be wise to tune out the disinformation from the Russia-hoax-media. In 2000, there was a rogue supreme court in Florida just as there is one now in Pennsylvania. One nuance, between the two, is that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court changed the State’s voting laws right before the election. Then, the right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another. There must be at least some assurance that the rudimentary requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness are satisfied. What’s more, the Governor of Pennsylvania and their supreme court made changes: 1. extending the receiving and counting of ballots beyond 8:00 PM on Election Day. 2, they eliminated the requirement for matching signatures. 3, they stopped requiring postal marks on the mailed-in ballots. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court violated Article II, Section II, Clause II of the federal Constitution acting as if they were the State’s legislature. Later, just because the media doesn’t agree with the presentation of Sidney Powell’s case doesn’t mean they have to destroy her or that RINO Republicans have to pile on. It may be difficult to win fairly because of judicial bias, but the case for fair elections must be made irrespective of the electoral outcome to ensure free and fair elections moving forward. Afterward, Fox News Host, Pete Hegseth, joins the program to discuss his new book “Modern Warriors: Real Stories from Real Heroes.”
THIS IS FROM:
Fox News
Georgia extends use of absentee ballot drop boxes for Jan. 5 runoff amid surge in requests
Washington Post
Conservatives grumbling about censorship say they’re flocking to Parler. They told us so on Twitter.
Just The News
Trump scores two wins as Michigan legislature, federal appeals court agree to election reviews
NY Times
Meet the top election misinformation ‘superspreaders.’
Newsbusters
Sick! Sharpton Warns Vaccine Might Be Racial Hoax Like Tuskegee Syphilis Study
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Image used with permission of Getty Images / Mark Wilson
Rough transcript of Hour 1
Hour 1 Segment 1
This is a time when having a truly irresponsible and corrupt media damages the country of the times, too, but this time in particular. As they put together these media packages. The various court actions and then interspersed with what a senator or former governor might say and. They create much. The people reporting on this have no idea what’s going on and they have no idea the history of this country and they have no idea what the Constitution compels. And that’s why so many of you are angry at the press, you have every right to be. And you should tune them out. Because you’re not learning the truth. Instead, there is now a juggernaut of pressure for the president just to drop everything and move out. Look at this, Michigan just certified. Well, there’s something interesting about that. The Republican legislature, the House and the Senate in Michigan had asked that board of four people not to act, that they wanted to conduct an investigation. So the legislature was ignored, even though the legislatures and charged under the federal constitution, did you hear that in one report today? No. So these media packages they’re putting together, the pressure mounts and so forth and so on, this is just more the same from the Russia hoax media and you really have to try and turn them out. Shut them off. So we’re going to take our time and go through this. A little bit differently. When you look back at 2000 and what took place in the state of Florida. You had a rogue Supreme Court. In the state of Pennsylvania, as an example, you had a rogue Supreme Court. In Florida, the justices of the court, I believe they were all Democrats, all maybe, but won, most of them were radicals. But even the chief justice, I believe Charles Wells was his name. He dissented against all the other colleagues on the Supreme Court when they. And they wouldn’t stop intervening in the count. Now we have something very different that’s taken place in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Prior to the election, just prior to the election. They changed. The way voting is to occur. Even the rogue Florida Supreme Court didn’t do that. On December 11, the United States Supreme Court having had enough of this. Held a hearing on the Florida courts latest action where I kept changing how votes were to occur in order to help Gore. And the next day, on December 12, by a five to four margin, the Supreme Court held that the Florida court had violated the equal protection clause. Of the United States Constitution. By ordering statewide manual recounts with different standards in the various counties. Now, Pennsylvania, you have the secretary of state excuse me, yeah, who’s a leftist Democrat who gave guidance to Democratic counties, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh among the top. On how to cure the vote. To contact the voters if their ballots weren’t. Properly cast. That opportunity was not afforded to many of the Republican districts. So she purposely. Sought to affect the outcome of the election. That clearly is a violation of the equal protection clause. And so when you have a federal judge in Pennsylvania appointed at the behest of a senator by the name Pat Toomey. Who spent almost no time listening to this case does not allow Discovery to take place. Blows off the equal protection and the constitutional issues and writes a nasty, sarcastic opinion, he had enough time to do that, I guess, into the wee hours of the morning because he knew the media would pick up on it and he knew he didn’t want to handle this hot potato. In its decision in Bush versus Gore, the Supreme Court stated, and I quote. The right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise, having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the state may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another. And the court continued. The recount process and its features here described as inconsistent. With a minimum procedures necessary to protect the fundamental right of each voter. In the special instance of a statewide recount under the authority of a single state judicial officer. When a court orders a statewide remedy, there must be at least some assurance that the rudimentary requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness are satisfied. That clearly applies not just to recounts, but to the initial vote. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the five Democrats against the two Republicans. Change the election laws. To benefit Joe Biden and the Democrats. It was well known. That the overwhelming majority of mail votes would be Democrats. And so the Supreme Court did at least three things, number one. It extended the count beyond 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Election Day. Number two. It said you don’t have to have signatures or signatures matching. Number three, it said you don’t have to have a postmark or if the postmark is not readable. That counted anyway. Three major changes. All pushed by the governor of Pennsylvania, a liberal Democrat, which the legislature had rejected, but the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania imposed on the state. How many ballots does that involve? Now you’re hearing all kinds of weird arguments now first you’re hearing there’s not enough ballots affected. And a federal judge has to be convinced that if there’s enough ballots affected. Then you can go forward and then you hear, do you really expect a federal judge to throw out tens of thousands, if not a couple hundred thousand votes, that’s not going to happen. Well, which is. Which is. The answer should be follow the Constitution and the law. Follow the Constitution and the law. So the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania violated Article two, Section one, clause two of the Constitution. By acting as a legislature, by acting as a partisan legislature on behalf of the Democrats, this is exactly what the Biden campaign was pushing for. It’s exactly what they got in the most important of the battleground states this election cycle. And you have a judge in Pennsylvania, a Republican who was a member of the Federalist Society, that simply means he paid his dues. Who beats his chest and pats himself on the head and says, look at me, I can write a nasty opinion, I’ll put Frankenstein’s name in there. I know how to work the press. I looked at this guy’s background before it became a federal judge, utterly unimpressive. A complete political appointment by Toomey, the guy had been some kind of a regional Republican guy, a complete. Reino Haak. Appointed at the behest of Pat Toomey. No, serious. Legal or constitutional credentials could have been picked out of a phone book. But he’s gutless. He’s gutless. It’s clear that the three this is in Men in black, it is clear that the three judicial originalists on the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Not able to assemble a majority of the court on the straightforward question of whether the Florida Supreme Court usurped the authority of the Florida legislature in ordering standardless manual recounts past the federal deadline. Nevertheless, the actions of the Florida Supreme Court was so egregious that a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court believes something had to be done. And while five justices signed on to the Supreme Court’s decision based on the equal protection clause violations, two additional justices actually embrace the equal protection argument, even though they voted in the minority for other reasons. And I believe Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas obviously tried to make the best of a bad situation, unable to convince O’Connor and Kennedy to overturn the Florida Supreme Court on Article two grounds. The difference right now is we don’t have Renquist, we have Roberts. And a potentially fatal decision was made a few weeks back. When the Supreme Court was asked by litigants in Pennsylvania, please. Stop the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, please rule. That their decisions in changing the election laws and undermining the state legislature in Article two. Should be repelled. Three justices. Very openly said, yes, we need to address this, Gorsuch Thomas. And Aledo. Cavanaugh. Move to the other side for reasons only he knows, he tried to explain them, but they’re incomprehensible. Roberts made a phony argument that it’s a state court, so he didn’t feel. Compelled to get involved. I guess Roberts, when it comes to reading comprehension, is very, very low because that’s not what the Constitution says it does. It delineate which quarter, anything of the sort. It specifically states who’s in charge. So we have a problem now, ladies and gentlemen, while the media. TV hosts and radio hosts, they want to focus on how bad the Trump lawyers are. The filing in Pennsylvania was actually quite strong. And it was given the back of the hand. And the problem is this. When a judge. Rules in favor of a motion to dismiss. Which clearly this judge should not have done. It makes it impossible for the plaintiff. To gather as much evidence as needs to be gathered, think about any lawsuits you were involved and so forth. The filing. Of a brief is the beginning of the process, not the end of the process. The filing of the brief presents issues. Issues that need to be resolved. And isn’t it interesting that in virtually every case that’s involving this campaign? Federal or state judges, they’re dismissing them one after another. Now, the media would have you believe. And talk show host would have you believe and legal analysts would have you believe it’s as a result of the poor quality of the filing. Most of them haven’t even read the filings, nor have they read what the courts have done. Motion to dismiss is a high bar. To get a dismissal, I’m not even talking about summary judgment, motion to dismiss right out of the box with a judge is supposed to read all the facts and the law in the favor of the plaintiff. The complainant. And even under those circumstances. They complain they can’t win, even if they’re right on all points. So at this judge in Pennsylvania. In dismissing the case and doing it the way he did it. Is to try and take the burden off his court. To try and humiliate the Trump campaign, so that would be the focus in on him. Because these judges are suing state and federal judges and Supreme Court justices. There Joe Biden has moved along, he’s picking a cabinet. That Republicans are beginning to fold. That people are going on Sunday TV shows, bloviating about things they have no knowledge of. Meanwhile, you and I are going to get stuck here. When a state or states can violate. Two parts of the Constitution, Article two and the Equal Protection Clause. And there’s no remedy. This is a huge problem that will go on in the future. I want to continue this when I return.
Hour 1 Segment 2
You could see these things coming back in 2004 in this very short segment, so I want to expand it beyond the bottom of the hour. Even before the first vote was cast in 2004, I point out presidential election, numerous lawsuits were filed, especially in battleground states. With the intention of influencing the election, this is from Men in Black that was written 15 years ago. The suits challenged everything from alleged equal protection violations affecting minorities, ballot access for prisoners, disenfranchisement of overseas voters, accuracy of voter registration rolls, absentee ballot requirements, provisional ballots and certain paperless voting technologies. And now they have perfected it earlier in earlier voting mail, in voting late counting, no signature, no signature matching, no GOP observers, Democrat strongholds. And so when you assert, like I do, that the state legislature needs to step in and insist that the electors should be chosen based on the votes that have been taken under existing law passed by the legislature and not by these unconstitutional actions, you’re attacked because the left has no interest in the Constitution and the Republicans just don’t give a damn. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 3
Another perfect example in Georgia you have these two crucial Senate races. Here’s the headline from Fox News. Georgia extends use of absentee ballot drop boxes for January five runoff amid surge in requests. Now, who did that? The five member Georgia state election board, chaired by Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, is a disaster. The state legislature didn’t do that. But he did it and this board did it. Do you think for one second that the framers of the Constitution would have drafted the Constitution or the ratifiers and the conventions would have ratified a constitution? That conveyed this kind of power to bureaucrats and some secretary of state didn’t even give it to a governor. They said the state legislature. So to me. It’s fraud when you violate the Constitution. Now, this mantra, you know, we have these media cycles, where’s the evidence, where’s the evidence? It’s a mantra that you never heard during the Russia collusion hoax. Where’s the evidence? Where’s the evidence? Where’s the evidence? You never heard. And there are hundreds of signed affidavit now which we’re running out of time. We’re running out of time. OK, whose fault is that? Where’s the Supreme Court in the matter that was raised with the Supreme Court? We have no idea. They’re sitting and watching. Let me tell you what they’re doing. They want to see if it’s even necessary for them to step in. So if Article two is violated, the hell with it. If the equal protection clause is violated, the hell with it. That’s what happens when you don’t have a solid chief justice. And when you hear these these fools who keep saying, move on, move on, move on, we will move on eventually. The problem is what kind of damage will have been done. Right now, the damage is at. Is that 10 from the number one to 10, 10 being the worst? And these rules, if they’re allowed to stand. We’ll stand for the next election in the election after that, and they’ll only get worse. All of these changes. All of these changes help one party. And now if you try to. To put the genie back into the bottle, you’re disenfranchising people, you see you’re suppressing the vote. This is how it works. So you destroy the procedure, you destroy the constitution there in your way. I mean, you have deadlines for a reason. I don’t believe the IRS would be governing itself this way, do you, Mr. Producer? Oh, you know, if there’s no postal date, don’t worry about it. You ever been audited, ladies and I haven’t, thank God. But if you are, you better have your papers. You better have postal date. You better have everything. It’s not. Wow. My mother got hit by a car. Why not? Who cares? Who cares? You’re at your tax return is late. That’s it. That’s the bottom line. You’re going to pay a penalty. Well, that’s not fair, and who cares fair, is it the word that matters? So we now have a voting system in a number of these states that the legislature never passed, and that means any judge or any groups, group of judges. Are now free to change election laws as they wish, and when you have elected judges in states, as you do in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. Then the Constitution can go to hell. And then when you have a federal judge who not only rubber stamps it. But then his sarcastic remarks. Then you can realize how dumb that guy is and he is. I want to tell Chief Justice Roberts. Cavanough. And the leftists on the court. The Republicans do not have 51 votes in the Senate. Depending on what happens on January 5th. Your entire institution is going to be changed because you failed to stand up and enforce the Constitution. It has consequences. It has consequences. I want to mention another point, Sydney, because everybody’s piling on Sydney, pal. I don’t have to agree with the way a lawyer presents their arguments, and most times, quite frankly, I don’t. I don’t have to agree with the way Rudy presents arguments, whether it was Ukraine or whatever Sydney Power presents her arguments and so forth and so on. But why are they trying to destroy her? The Republicans, Chris Christie, who sits on his fat ass. Why are they trying to destroy her? They’re trying to destroy her because of the Michael Flynn case, frankly. That’s why. These comments she makes and I can’t even fathom, quite frankly, about China, Cuba and the communists and so forth. Time will tell. But I’m thinking here, Mr. is that any more outrageous than the Russia collusion argument? Well, every time you turned around, there was Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia. And they tried to remove a president on Russia. And now we know all the senior officials under oath said there was no Russian collusion. They tried to destroy the man over Russia collusion, the FBI was used to try and plant the idea of Russia collusion, the FBI put spies in his campaign. The director of the FBI takes this phony dossier written by a Russian spy paid for by the Democrats, was through this organization. This Marc Elias is involved, as a matter of fact. And I can go on and on and on, you know, the gory details. Did Sydney Powell do anything like that? Adam Schiff has never said show us the evidence. I’ve got to have it, show us the evidence. He never had any evidence to show. Hearings, criminal investigations, reporters everywhere. Where is the evidence, where’s the evidence where you never heard that? You never heard it ever. And the media were perfectly happy with that. In fact, they kept promoting the idea of Russia collusion and they haven’t missed a beat. There must have been. Now, when they are presented with evidence. Like mounds and mounds of evidence involving the Biden family and Hunter Biden. You actually have a laptop, you have a hard drive, you got the boy’s signature, you have a witness. You have emails, texts. You got it all. It’s all right there. And what do they do? Ignored it worse. They wanted you to think it was a Russian disinformation campaign. Evidence everywhere, everywhere you had a witness come forward with a real name. And a stellar background and hero. Who they pretended didn’t even exist. And The Washington Post and The New York Times and all the media outlets didn’t want to follow up on any of the mounds of evidence that were available to the damn hard drive. Lots of evidence, tons of evidence. They didn’t care. Now it’s where’s the evidence? Where’s the evidence? The biggest problem right now is that the Trump campaign has not been given a day in court. What happened in Pennsylvania was a disgrace. I don’t know if the case will hold up or not. I think a lot of these judges now are watching what’s going on and they don’t want to get dragged into all this controversy. I really do. I think that’s the problem. Anything goes now. The politicians talking about destroying the Supreme Court, Pelosi’s talking about he let’s rebalance the entire judiciary. So the judiciary is under attack and the independence of the judiciary is under attack. So these are men and women of flesh and blood and they’re very nervous now, these judges. Very nervous. Those that aren’t partisan hacks in the first place. So the Trump campaign really is not getting a fair shot in some of these cases. Now, I could sit back like the other day and just see how these lawyers, they really suck, you know, I bring these cases ambulate. What do they think they’re done? I mean, they have enough bout this is rather fundamental ladies in general. It’s more fundamental. Then what the. The what the people in the in the upper stands are are saying. There’s is a big deal what’s going on in this country. They are enshrining and institutionalizing fraudulent practices. They’re doing going around, in many cases, the Republican legislatures, the Republican legislatures are scared to death. They really won’t stand up to this. Maybe they’ll hold a hearing or two, but that’s about it. The media and their professors are out there saying those legislatures better not act. They’re warning anybody who stands in the way that they intend to destroy them, all the guardrails are off. I mean, even look at this parler. Here’s a little entrepreneurial company. I don’t know the owner. I don’t know who’s what. It doesn’t matter to me. And they’re competing against Twitter and Facebook. And The Washington Post and The New York Times keep doing stories about how its right wing, how they’re into this Cucu Cunegonde, I don’t even know Akunin is they throw us all in with that, that this is basically going to be a padded room where we all talk to each other on. No. No rational, no reasonable explanation for why parlor’s growing is growing, because people like me. With huge audiences and huge followings are not going to put up with censorship anymore. It’s really that simple. And rather than writing stories on censorship, what do they say, oh, they keep putting up this false information and false. I will check what I’ve said behind this microphone on my record against the record of The Washington Post in The New York Times any day of the week. Any day of the week. So the media have no problem anymore with censorship, as long as it’s aimed at you and the media have no problem with trashing. These other sites that are trying to develop. Because they don’t want the competition. What’s happened to The Washington Post in The New York Times, they were always pretty easy, if you know what I mean. But now they’re all in. Now they’re all lined up to their eyeballs. They don’t want evidence, they do want evidence. It just depends on the person, it depends on the situation. And he got to watch I don’t, but those of you who. I guess you’re into pain, you watch fools like Jake Tapper. Or his ilk on television, you’re just watching a Democrat hack. That’s all you’re watching. An angry, moronic partisan leftist Democrat hack, that’s what CNN demands of their hosts. That’s what MSNBC demands of their hosts. We’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 4
OK, I think the Israelis, the Taiwanese countries that are good allies of ours, should Joe Biden be sworn in many ways, they’re going to have to go and go it alone. Because you look at the people Biden wants in his cabinet and you look at the people who are whispering in his ear, they are truly radical. And their agenda is going to be quite radical. Basically, what they want to do across the board is reinstitute the Obama administration and then move radically faster and harder to the left. That’s what they plan to do. And I’m very concerned about these election systems now in these states. I’m very concerned about how the judiciary is conducting itself. The lawlessness is spreading. And what the judiciary is doing, like this guy, Brandt and others and Roberts, they’re completely undermining the integrity of the vote and the people’s faith in the process. Because there are no referees anymore. And it’s only going to get worse. They’re turning our voting system into California, California, within two years, two years, became a one party state with massive majorities. Now they have super duper majorities in the House and the Senate. And while we can win some seats here and there, we have no hope of ever taking back the majority in California. They took a Republican state that Ronald Reagan won as governor, that Ronald Reagan won as President George H.W. Bush ran. He won the first time around. And within a handful of years, they turned it on its head. That’s exactly what this election’s all about. You’ll look back on this and you’ll see who the fighters are and you’ll see who the nebish are, who the quislings are, where they and their votes were, and that fraud where the time’s running out. Well, people who want to destroy our court system destroy our Senate district. Oh, time’s running. We abide by the clock. We abide by the Constitution. And they want to destroy all of it. Who do you think wins in a battle like that? And by the way, why do you think I’m coming, coming under relentless attack, not by the snarky, buffoonish types at. These various media organizations. Because they’re part of the tyranny, they are totalitarian in their mindset, they are radical leftists, neo Nazis, that’s what they are. They don’t even know some of them what they are, but they are their heroes, John Dewey and others. They thought Marxism was pretty good and they developed a way to apply it to the United States. It’s called Progressivist. There you go. We’ll be right back..